OP solved it, closing

is my code (:

Epic Shit dude, mean while I tried to create a for loop and iterate the list I was looping and used .sort and created a whole sorting function 😂😂😂

good code)

This is realy good

Thank you

It is explained in the description. The second element of [3, 7] pair comes before the second element of [5, 5] pair, hence that should be the result.

sum_pairs([10, 5, 2, 3, 7, 5], 10)

why [3,7] why not [5,5]

Please help me to understand the logic

sorry for the weird formatting, it got screwed up when I posted it normally, so I tried to make it as readable as I could lol

Next time you can use Markdown formatting to format it: https://github.com/adam-p/markdown-here/wiki/Markdown-Cheatsheet#code

Something in the "Excruciatingly Long List Tests" is timing out for you :D

BTW:
This looks like O(n^3) (I'm not good at time complexity, so that's probably a bit inaccurate), But I see an O(n) solution is possible (I think that's O(n), where n = len(ints)). Try another way of doing it.

God, that's so funny

this one kicked my beginner ass.
btw it never gets old when i finish one of these in 2 hours with a 50-line solution, and i go check the top answers and some swedish dude solved it with 1 line of code. FeelsBadMan

Thank you, I got it working.

ok, that's actually it, but because of sort of an "edge case". Print stuff inside your loop, so that you'll hit the buffer limit before anything else (print enough, tho), that should allow you to track what you forgot.

that means you're storing too much data in memory. You need to change your approach a bit to make it "memory wise"

wait, forget that. I forgot you needed to return the complete sequence. No idea for now.